How are positions determined on the team?

Are ladder matches the only thing that determines the position a player plays on the team? What other factors are considered..such as a situation of a blue chip freshmen over a senior who has had the #1 position for the last 2 years or so? Do academic grades ever factor into it as well...if ever? Any input is appreciated. Thnx.

Challenge matches are the main component, but as the season goes on, you see how players are competing in real match situations. Some people get up for challenge matches and others have problems beating friends. Plus, some need the help of being coached during a match. It can be hard for a freshman to compete in real match situations versus a seasoned veteran. If one player's record is significantly better than the person in front of him or her on the lineup, then a switch is in order.

I believe most D-1 coaches don't rely on challenge matches. Results against one player (assuming the match is competitive) doesn't really mean anything about who will win against a variety of opponents. Plus, there have to be concerns about team unity when you are pitting highly competitive athletes against each other.

Any coach who knows what they are doing can figure out their lineup by observing practice, practice matches / sets and match play.

Are ladder matches the only thing that determines the position a player plays on the team? What other factors are considered..such as a situation of a blue chip freshmen over a senior who has had the #1 position for the last 2 years or so? Do academic grades ever factor into it as well...if ever? Any input is appreciated. Thnx.

Click to expand...

Grades only matter to the extent of academic eligibility/ineligibility.

Challenge matches are a component, but as others have said, there are a lot of other things such as past results, particularly in tight situations. We had a guy who played #5/6 who would get beat all the time in practice but was great at grinding and could consistently pull out three set wins in match situations; he was one of those guys you definitely wanted in the lineup in a close match (as opposed to say someone who was more of a streaky hot/cold player with inconsistent results).

In your hypothetical situation, if there isn't much of a talent gap between a blue chip freshman and a senior who's played #1 for the last two years I'd play the senior up top because of leadership/experience. The freshman will have his day and can get experience at 2 or 3.

When you are talking about guys who are about equal in talent level and are talking about the lower positions or doubles, other factors may include scholarship vs. walk-on status (don't want to pay a guy to sit on the bench), playing style and matchup, work ethic in practice, year (reward seniors or groom freshmen), health/injury status, etc.

The only challenge match I played was when I was trying to make the team. I was "walking on" to the team. Other than that, I never played or saw any challenge matches. But positions were determined based on recruiting stats, practice observations and, as the season progresses, match results.

A bad coach who knows nothing about tennis will use his hunches, and personal bias and usually pick players who tow the line and sits players who offers suggestions to help the team. This coach is insecure and plays passive then aggressive against those who challenge his authority. This just fired this type of coach at UPenn.

Tennis is a game of match ups. A good coach knows his players and what they are capable of and how they compete against various styles. He also knows the competitive teams' players in the league that they compete in. He will then match his lineup to against the competition's lineup to extract the most wins. This coach knows how to lead, inspire and motivate his players to achieve more as a team than they could individually. This is the coach you want to play for.